The trans-Himalayan Mahatmas are men living on earth

The trans-Himalayan Mahatmas are men living on earth v. 10.20, www.philaletheians.co.uk, 21 September 2020

of 17

The trans-Himalayan

Mahatmas are men

living on earth

http://www.philaletheians.co.uk/

HIGHER ETHICS AND DEVOTION SERIES

MAHATMAS ARE MEN LIVING ON EARTH


of 17

Abstract and train of thoughts

Part 1. Are the Himalayan Brothers real?

Comments upon an article by Mohini Chatterji on whether the Himalayan Brothers exist,

by Boris de Zirkoff. 3

Editorial response by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky.

Annotations by Boris de Zirkoff. 5

Part 2. Testimony from independent eyewitness

Letter from Preo Nath Banerjee on the existence of the Mahatmas. 11


Historically important notes by Boris de Zirkoff. 13

Part 3. The Himalayan Brothers possess the earth by the power of

their occult knowledge

Letter from R. Ragoonath Row on the Puranic Dynasties of the Moryas and the Koothoomi. 15




ARE THE HIMALAYAN BROTHERS REAL?


of 17

Comments upon an article by Mohini Chatterji on whether the

Himalayan Brothers exist, by Boris de Zirkoff.

First published in The Theosophist, Vol. V, No 3 (51), December 1883, pp. 83-86. Republished in Blavat-

sky Collected Writings, (COMMENT ON “THE HIMALAYAN BROTHERS – DO THEY EXIST?” ) VI pp. 21-22.

The article to which the present Comment is appended is by Mohini Mohun

Chatterji, F.T.S., and is one of the most important contributions to the early

Theosophist. It places before the reader two entirely independent accounts

of the actual existence of the Adept known under the name of Koot-Hoomi,

or Koothumi. One of these accounts is by a Tibetan peddler at Darjeeling,

and the other by a young Brahmachārin at Dehra-Dun. This evidence was

gathered by the writer in October and November, 1882, prior to his own

personal experience along similar lines, regarding which, he says, he has no

right to speak in public. Both testimonies mention a group of disciples

known as the Koothoompas, meaning “men of Koot-Hoomi.”

The evidence of the Brahmachārin is corroborated from an entirely different

source in the same issue of The Theosophist, namely in the letter entitled

“Existence of the Himalayan Mahatmas,” to which H.P. Blavatsky attached

an editorial note. See further in the present volume.

Mohini M. Chatterji’s article was written on instructions from Master K.H.,

who was his Teacher. In a letter whose original is in the Adyar Archives,

Master K.H. writes to Mohini as follows:

I want you, my dear boy, to write an account for The Theosophist, of

what the pedlar said, and the Dehra Brahmacharia. Make it as strong

as you can, and have all the witnesses at Darjeeling and Dehra. But

the name is written Kuthoompa (disciples of Kut-hoomi) tho’ pro-

nounced Kethoomba. Write and send it to Upāsika, Allahabad.

Upāsika, meaning female disciple, stands for H.P. Blavatsky. The letter from

which the above quotation is taken was received in November 1882, and

can be found in Letters From the Masters of the Wisdom, Second Series,

Transcribed and Annotated by C. Jinarājadāsa, Adyar: Theosophical Pub-

lishing House, 1925.





of 17

It would appear that Mohini’s account was not published at the time owing

to the fact that another account, namely, by S. Ramaswamier, appeared in

The Theosophist.1 Its publication was delayed until December, 1883.

In connection with the above, the student’s attention is invited to two other

articles of great importance, both to be found in The Theosophist: “How a

‘Chela’ Found His ‘Guru,’” by S. Ramaswamier, F.T.S.,2 and “A Great Riddle

Solved,” by Dāmodar K. Māvalankar, F.T.S.3 [22].

— Boris de Zirkoff.

“Chelas and Lay Chelas”

“Chelaship rules from the Kiu-te”

“Mahatmas and Chelas”

— in our Higher Ethics and Devotion Series. — ED. PHIL.



sky Collected Writings, (COMMENT ON “THE HIMALAYAN BROTHERS – DO THEY EXIST?” ) VI p. 22.

Secondary evidence is no longer necessary. On November the 20th at 10 a.m. two

telegrams were received by us, dated Lahore, one from Colonel Olcott, who noti-

fied us that he had been visited in person by Mahatma “K.H.” on the preceding

night; and the other — from Mr. W.T. Brown, F.T.S. of the “London Lodge,” Theo-

sophical Society, in these words: “Visited early this morning by Mahatma K.H.

who left me a silk handkerchief as a memorial, etc.!” and today, 22nd, having tele-

graphed to both those gentlemen for permission to announce the long expected

event in The Theosophist, we received an answer that not only could “Master’s

visit be mentioned,” but that our President, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Dāmodar “had

another call last night near their tent, the Master being accompanied in flesh and

body by brother Djual Khool.” Unless Mr. W.T. Brown, to complete the trio, be

classed by our Spiritualistic friends also among the “Occidental Humourists,” the

question as to real existence of the Mahatma, is pretty well settled now. One wit-

ness may be mistaken as to facts, and even a doubt may be cast upon the evi-

dence of two witnesses. But when it comes to the testimony of three or more wit-

nesses speaking to a fact that occurred in their presence doubt would become

1 See below.

2 Vol. IV, No 3, December 1882, pp. 67-69.

3 Vol. V, Nos 3-4, December to January 1883-1884, pp. 61-62.





of 17

absurd even in a Court of Justice. We have not yet received the particulars, but

since we have been notified that Mahatma K.H. on his way to Siam would most

likely pass via Madras in a week or so, we have every reason to suppose that our

President and Mr. Brown saw the real, living body, not merely as before — the

astral form of the Master.

Annotations by Boris de Zirkoff.

From Blavatsky Collected Writings, (THE HIMALAYAN BROTHERS) VI pp. 22-32.

During his first visit to Col. Olcott and W.T. Brown, in the early morning of

November 20th, 1883, Master K.H. left a letter with each one of them. We

find in Col. Olcott’s Diaries the following entry on that particular date: [23]

1.55 a.m. Koot Hoomi came in body to my tent. Woke me suddenly out

of sleep, pressed a note (wrapped in silk) into my left hand, and laid

his hand upon my head. He then passed into Brown’s compartment

and integrated another note in his hand (Brown’s). He spoke to me.

Was sent by Mahā Chohan.

The letter received by H.S. Olcott on this occasion is preserved in the Ar-

chives at Adyar. To it is attached a slip of paper with the following notation

in Col. Olcott’s handwriting:

Letter to H.S.O. formed in his own hand by Master K.H. during a night

visit to him, in his camp on the Maidan outside Lahore.1

It is probable that Col. Olcott attached this slip at some later date, as he re-

fers in it to his Old Diary Leaves written some years after. His account, as

given in this work2 is as follows:

I was sleeping in my tent, the night of the 19th, when I rushed back

towards external consciousness on feeling a hand laid on me. The

camp being on an open plain, and beyond the protection of the Lahore

police, my first animal instinct was to protect myself from a possible

religious fanatical assassin, so I clutched the stranger by the upper

arms, and asked him in Hindustani who he was and what he wanted.

It was all done in an instant, and I held the man tight, as would one

who might be attacked the next moment and have to defend his life.

But the next instant a kind, sweet voice said:

“Do you not know me? Do you not remember me?”

It was the voice of the Master K.H. A swift revulsion of feeling came

over me, I relaxed my hold on his arms, joined my palms in reverential

salutation, and wanted to jump out of bed to show him respect. But

his hand and voice stayed me, and after a few sentences had been ex-

changed, he took my left hand in his, gathered the fingers of his right

1 See Old Diary Leaves.

2 III Series, pp. 36-38.





of 17

into the palm, and stood quiet beside my cot, from which I could see

his divinely benignant face by the light of the lamp that burned on a

packing-case at his back. Presently I felt some soft substance forming

in my hand, and the next minute the Master laid his kind hand on my

forehead, uttered a blessing, and left my half of the large tent to visit

Mr. W.T. Brown, who slept in the other half behind a canvas screen

that divided the tent into two rooms. When I had time to pay attention

to myself, I found myself holding in my left hand a folded paper en-

wrapped in a silken cloth. To go to the lamp, open and read it, was

naturally my first impulse. I found it to be a letter of private counsel,

containing prophecies of the death of two undesignated, then active,

opponents of the Society . . . [24]

The text of the letter integrated in Col. Olcott’s hand, and the facsimile of

which is appended herewith,1 reads as follows:

Since the commencement of your probationary term in America, you

have had much to do with me, tho’ your imperfect development has of-

ten made you mistake me for Atrya, and often to fancy your own mind

at work when it was mine trying to influence and to talk with yours. Of

course, by your own canons of evidence you have not until now been a

thoroughly qualified witness, since we have never previously — to your

knowledge — met in the flesh. But at last you are, and one object in

view in my making the journey from the Ashrum to Lahore was to give

you this last substantial proof. You have not only seen and conversed

with, but touched me, my hand has pressed yours, and the K.H. of

fancy becomes the K of fact. Your sceptical action, often running into

extreme conservatism — perhaps the very last trait that the careless

would suspect you of — has seriously and constantly impeded your

inner unfolding. It has made you suspicious — sometimes cruelly so —

of Upāsika, of Borg, of Djual-K., even of Dāmodar and D. Nath, whom

you love as sons. This meeting of ours should radically change the

state of your mind. Should it not, so much the worse for your future:

truth never comes, burglar-like, thro’ barred windows & iron-sheathed

doors.

I come to you not alone of my own accord and wish, but also by order

of the Mahā Chohan, to whose insight the future lies like an open

page. At New York you demanded of M. an objective proof that his visit

to you was not a māyā — & he gave it; unasked, I give you the present

one: tho’ I pass out of your sight this note will be to you the reminder

of our conferences. I now go to young Mr. Brown to try his intuitive-

ness. Tomorrow night when the camp is quiet & the worst of the ema-

nations from your audience have passed away, I shall visit you again,

for a longer conversation, as you must be forewarned against certain

things in the future. Fear not and doubt not as you have feared &

1 [Facsimile on page 25]





of 17

doubted at supper last night: the first month of the coming year of

your era will have hardly dawned when two more of the “enemies” will

have passed away. Ever be vigilant, zealous and judicious; for remem-

ber that the usefulness of the Theosophical Society largely depends

upon your exertions, and that our blessings follow its suffering

“Founders” and all who help on their work.

K.H.

The letter is written in black ink, the original being now somewhat faded. It

is on one sheet, and written on both sides. [29] The reproduction is to its ex-

act size, facsimiles I and II making one side of the paper, and III and IV the

other.1

In this letter, D. Nath stands for Dharbagiri Nath, known also as “Bawaji,”

whose actual name was S. Krishnamachāri or Krishnamaswami. Bawaji

went with H.P. Blavatsky to Europe in 1884 and 1885, but turned later

against her. His name of Dharbagiri Nath gave rise to a lot of unnecessary

confusion. It was originally the name of a very high Chela of Master K.H.

Bawaji stood in some special occult relationship to this high Chela, being

allowed to take his name as a “mystery name” when Bawaji became a pro-

bationary chela. It is probable that the high Chela of that name took pos-

session of Bawaji’s body upon occasion until the latter failed.2 The term

Upāsika has reference to Blavatsky herself. Djual-K. stands for Djual-Khool,

the favourite disciple of Master K.H., who since those days has himself

reached the state of Mahatmaship. The “objective proof” spoken of in the

latter was the fetā or turban, now in the Archives at Adyar, which Master

M. left with Col. Olcott as a proof that his visit to him in New York was a re-

ality.3 A photograph of this turban has been published in The Theosophist.

4

The text of the letter integrated in W.T. Brown’s hand was published by him

in his autobiographical pamphlet entitled My Life5 which appeared in the

Fall of 1885. He states on the title page that “the following pamphlet has

been prepared for the writer’s acquaintances, especially in Scotland.” This

pamphlet is extremely rare nowadays; we know of no other copy of it than

the one on file at the Adyar Library. The following excerpt from it gives in

Brown’s own words his experiences at Lahore:

On the 19th of Nov. 1883, for instance, at Lahore I see a man who im-

presses me as being Koot Hoomi and on the morning of the 20th I am

awakened by the presence of someone in my tent. A voice speaks to

me and I find a letter and silk handkerchief within my hand. I am con-

scious that the letter and silk handkerchief are not placed in my hand

1 [Facsimiles reproduced in Blavatsky Collected Writings, VI pp. 25-28. — ED. PHIL.]

2 Cf. The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A.P. Sinnett, pp. 173, 174.

3 Cf. Old Diary Leaves, I, pp. 379-80.

4 Vol. LIII, August 1932, pp. 496-97.

5 Printed by D. Lauber, Freiburg, Baden, Germany.





of 17

in the customary manner. They grow “out of nothing.” I feel a stream

of “magnetism” and lo! it is “materialized.” I rise to read my letter and

examine the handkerchief. My visitor is gone. The handkerchief is a

white one of the finest silk, with the initials K.H. marked in blue. The

letter is also in blue in a bold hand. The matter of it is as follows:

“What Dāmodar told you at Poona is true. We approach nearer

and nearer to a person as he goes on preparing himself [30] for the

same. You first saw us in visions, then in astral forms, though

very often not recognized, then in body at a short distance from

you. Now you see me in my own physical body” (that is to say I

would have seen him if I had turned my head) “so close to you as

to enable you to give to your countrymen the assurance that you

are from personal knowledge as sure of our existence as you are

of your own. Whatever may happen, remember that you will be

watched and rewarded in proportion to your zeal and work for

the cause of Humanity which the Founders of the Theosophical

Society have imposed upon themselves. The handkerchief is left

as a token of this visit. Dāmodar is competent enough to tell you

about the Rawal Pindi Member. — K.H.”

In W.T. Brown’s pamphlet on Some Experiences in India, the letter quoted

above is merely referred to. What became of the original is not definitely

known.

Prior to his second visit, on the evening of November 20th, 1883, Master

K.H. sent the following note:

Watch for the signal: prepare to follow the messenger who will come

for you.

K.H.

This second brief communication, facsimile of which is appended herewith,1

is also in the Adyar Archives, and has an explanatory note of Col. Olcott’s

attached to it, which reads:

Note to H.S.O. from Master K.H. to prepare him for a visit in the phys-

ical body in his tent at Lahore.2

The account of this second meeting can be found in Old Diary Leaves.3 The

messenger spoken of was Djual-Khool. The text of both letters can also be

found in Letters from the Masters of the Wisdom.4 Facsimiles are from The

Theosophist.5 [31]

1 [Facsimile on page 30]

2 See Old Diary Leaves.

3 III, 41-43

4 First Series, Transcribed and Compiled by C. Jinarājadāsa, Theosophical Publishing House, Adyar, Madras,

India; 4th ed., 1948, pp. 44-46.

5 August 1932, pp. 567-570, 573.





of 17

These visits of Master K.H. are also mentioned in The Letters of H.P. Blavat-

sky to A.P. Sinnett, p. 72, and in Wm. Tournay Brown’s pamphlet entitled

Some Experiences in India, the original of which is extremely rare. It was

published by Dr. Franz Hartmann and Richard Harte, London, under the

authority of the London Lodge, T.S. It has, however, been reprinted in The

Canadian Theosophist, Toronto.1

As to Wm. Tournay Brown, he was an earnest and aspiring young man from

Scotland. After a long course of study pursued in Strasburg, Zurich, and

Edinburgh, he was graduated at the University of Glasgow, April 1882, and

went on a long holiday trip to Canada and the United States. After the trip,

his health being rather precarious, he was treated and greatly helped by the

eminent homeopath, Dr. Nichols, with whom he resided in London in 1883.

At the house of this doctor, he met Frau Gustav Gebhard, of Elberfelt, Ger-

many, who was a pupil of Éliphas Lévi and had come to England to be initi-

ated into the Theosophical Society by A.P. Sinnett, who had just then ar-

rived from India. Mr. Brown soon became deeply interested in occult litera-

ture, met Mr. Sinnett and was admitted into the T.S.

He conceived a strong desire to go to India, in order to participate in the

work of the T.S., and thus to draw nearer to the great Teachers themselves.

He sailed on August 25th, 1883. He was received with open arms by both

H.P. Blavatsky and Col. Olcott. The latter, then on a protracted tour of In-

dia, took occasion to explain to him in a letter the opportunities as well as

the dangers connected with his present decision and gave him some specific

warnings. Mr. Brown nevertheless eagerly joined Col. Olcott on his tour,

overtaking him at Sholapore.

It was during this tour that the two successive meetings with Master K.H.

took place near Lahore, as described by Col. Olcott, and mentioned in the

above Editorial Note by H.P. Blavatsky.

Mr. Brown received from Master K.H. several communications through Bla-

vatsky and Dāmodar, both before and after his tour with Col. Olcott. The

spiritual opportunities facing him at the time were very unusual. He himself

tells his readers that as a result of a strong desire to become a chela of the

Brothers, he resolved on the evening of January 7th, 1884, to present him-

self for probation. He was fully “warned as to the difficulties of the road” he

desired to tread, and was “assured that by a close adherence to truth and

trust in ‘my Master,’ all must turn out well.”

Brown’s case, however, was one of those sad cases of which the Theosophi-

cal Movement has had a considerable number. [32] Col. Olcott, writing of

him in his Old Diary Leaves,2 says that Brown’s own account shows him

unfortunately to have been

1 Vol. XXVIII, No 4, June 15th, 1947, pp. 117-25.

2 III, 326





of 17

. . . an emotional sentimentalist, quite unfit for practical life in the

world. He had chopped and changed before coming to us, and has

been doing it pretty much ever since; the latest news being that he has

turned Catholic, taken the soutane, kept it on only a few days, became

again a laic, and is now teaching in a Roman Catholic college in

Madras Presidency, and married to an Eurasian widow lady of ripe

age. May he prosper in his undertakings, and find that peace of mind

for which he has so long been hoping.1

— Boris de Zirkoff.]

1 See BROWN in Bio-bibliographical Index, for further details.



TESTIMONY FROM INDEPENDENT EYEWITNESS


of 17

Letter from Preo Nath Banerjee on the existence of the Mahat-

mas.


sky Collected Writings, (EXISTENCE OF THE HIMALAYAN MAHATMAS) VI pp. 37-38.

In May or June last, a young Bengali Brahmachāri happened to pass through this

station on his way to Almora. During his stay here he [was] put up in the house of an

up-country gentleman where I met him to hear his discourses on Vedāntic Philoso-

phy and Hinduism in general. He kindly called on me and then, at our request, nar-

rated certain incidents of his travels to Mānasa-sarovara and back.

One of them was very remarkable. He said that on his way back from Kailas he met a

party of Sadhus. They were resting in a small tent which they had pitched for their

accommodation. He went amongst them to beg for some food, as he had taken none

since two or three days excepting leaves of trees and grass. He saw an elderly Sadhu

engaged in reading the Vedas, whom he took to be the chief. On enquiring the name

of this Sadhu he was told by some that his name was Kauthumpa, and by others as

Kauthumi.1 He waited till this gentleman had finished his reading and after the ex-

change of the customary greetings the Sadhu ordered his chelas to give some food to

our Brahmachāri. A chela brought a piece of dried cow-dung and placed it before his

guru who breathed on it and it was lighted. The Brahmachāri waited there for an

hour or two and during this interval he saw one or two persons suffering from some

disease or other coming there for treatment. The chief gave them some rice after

breathing upon it; they ate of it and walked away cured. I forgot to tell you that the

Brahmachāri had been to Mānasa-sarovara in 1882.

Are we to understand that the Kauthumi or Kauthumpa whom this Brahmachārin

saw somewhere near Kailas is the same personage who is now known as Koothumi,

one of the Himalayan Brothers? If this be so, then we have the testimony of an unin-

terested person who saw him in his living body. I may mention to you that this

Brahmachārin told us he never heard of Theosophy or of the Himalayan Brothers till

he returned to the plains. He is a young man about 24 years old and knows English

but imperfectly. He is a Chela of the Almora Swami with whom he is now studying

Sanskrit and we saw him again at Almora at the end of October last. He is not a The-

osophist and in fact his views and those of his guru, who are pronounced Vedāntists,

do not agree with those of the Theosophists. So, in all respects, he is an uninterested

witness. He is publishing an account of his travels in a Bengali Magazine called the

1 Our Mahatma does not look “elderly” whatever his age may be. — H.P. Blavatsky.





of 17

Bharati 1published at Calcutta and edited by Babu Dijendra Nath Tagore. I believe he

will give details of his interview with this Sadhu, whom he heard called as Kau-

thumpa, in that Magazine.

He told us that he saw several persons at, and near Mānasa-sarovara [38] (there being

a great gathering there that year on account of the Kumbhuk Mela), who could light

fuel by breathing upon it. At Mānasa-sarovara he met a Chohan Lama but there were

several of this name. Your Note on the above is kindly solicited.

PREO NATH BANERJEE, F.T.S.

Vakil, High Court.

BAREILLY,

15th November, 1883.



sky Collected Writings, (EXISTENCE OF THE HIMALAYAN MAHATMAS) VI p. 37.

This new and unexpected testimony comes this moment, as we are correcting the

proofs of Brother Mohini M. Chatterji’s evidence about the same Brahmachārin. We

had it from him fourteen months ago, but, at the advice of Mr. Sinnett, withheld it

from publication at the time. Evidently our Bareilly Brothers have not heard, as we

have, of this first account now published by us on pages 83 et seq. If this is not an

independent and strong testimony in our favour, then we do not know what any

more proofs can be given. Whether the “elderly” looking “Kauthumpa” as the Brah-

machārin calls the Sadhu seen by him, is our Mahatma Koothumi or not (we doubt

this, for he is not “elderly” looking) it is shown at any rate that there are men known

by the name of Kauthumpa (or the disciples, lit. men, of Koothumi) in Tibet, whose

master’s name must, therefore, be Koothumi, and that we have not invented the

name. Most probably the person seen by the Brahmachārin was Ten-dub Ughien, the

lama next to our Mahatma — and the chief and guide of his chelas on their travels.

He is an elderly man and a great book-worm. The polemics that have taken place on

these pages some months back between the venerable Almora Swami and our Broth-

er T. Subba Row, during which the Swami came down in his wrath upon the inno-

cent editor, — are a good warrant that neither the respected Sadhu of the Almora

Hills nor his pupil would be likely to corroborate us, unless they could not help it.

Still, the Brahmachārin may have seen quite a different person. There are in Tibet

many sects — and one of these is the sect of the Kah-dām-pa — a name bearing a

1 [This periodical is a landmark both in the evolution of Bangla literature and in the rise of prominent women

writers and editors. It was published from the Tagore family of Jorasanko, and was often acknowledged as a Tagore family magazine. When Swarnakumari Debi took the responsibility of its publication from Dwijen-

dranath Tagore in 1884, it became the second Bangla periodical to be edited by a woman, the first being Anathini by Thakomoni Debi (1875). It became also the first well organised, widely circulated and well ac-

claimed monthly in the Bangla language. The periodical was not established to support the women’s cause, but Swarnakumari turned it into a women’s magazine. When the publication of Bharati ceased in 1333 B.S. (1926),

it set a record of the first longest surviving Bangla monthly. In the golden jubilee year of Bharati many of the

contemporary women writers acknowledged it as their first stepping stone on the way to becoming a writer.]





of 17

close resemblance to that of Kauthumpa. There are among the former many learned

lamas and adepts, but they are not our Mahatmas, who belong to no sect.

Historically important notes by Boris de Zirkoff.

From Blavatsky Collected Writings, (THE HIMALAYAN MAHATMAS) VI pp. 39-40.

In his historically-important article, “A Great Riddle Solved,”1 Dāmodar K.

Māvalankar, who was a pupil of Master K H., throws some light upon the story

of the Brahmachārin. Dāmodar was at Jammu, in Kashmir, together with Col.

Henry S. Olcott and his party, at the end of November 1883. On November 25th,

he went for a couple of days to the Āśrama of his Teacher. His disappearance

had been very sudden and unexpected, resulting in a great deal of anxiety on

the part of both Madame Blavatsky and Col. Olcott, as to whether he would re-

turn at all. He did return on November 27th, greatly changed and in much more

robust health.

Regarding this visit, Dāmodar writes as follows:

The fact is, that I had the good fortune of being sent for, and permitted to

visit a Sacred Ashrum where I remained for a few days in the blessed

company of several of the much doubted MAHATMAS of Himavat and Their

disciples. There I met not only my beloved Gurudeva and Col. Olcott’s

Master, but several others of the Fraternity, including one of the Highest.

I regret the extremely personal nature of my visit to those thrice blessed

regions prevents my saying more of it. Suffice it that the place I was per-

mitted to visit is in the HIMALAYAS, not in any fanciful Summer Land, and

that I saw Him in my own sthūla śarīra [physical body] and found my

Master identical with the form I had seen in the earlier days of my Chela-

ship. Thus, I saw my beloved Guru not only as a living man, but actually

as a young one in comparison with some other Sadhus of the blessed

company, only far kinder, and not above a merry remark and conversa-

tion at times. Thus on the second day of my arrival, after the meal hour, I

was permitted to hold an intercourse for over an hour with my Master.

Asked by him smilingly, what it was that made me look at Him so per-

plexed, I asked in my turn:

How is it, MASTER, that some of the members of our Society have

taken into their heads a notion that you were “an elderly man,” and

that they have even seen you clairvoyantly looking an old man

passed sixty?

To which he pleasantly smiled and said, that this latest misconception

was due to the reports of a certain Brahmachārin, a pupil of a Vedāntic

Swami in the N.W.P. — who had met last year in Tibet the chief of a sect,

an elderly Lama, who was his (my Master’s) travelling companion at that

time. The said Brahmachārin having spoken of the encounter in India,

had led several persons to mistake the Lama for himself. As to his being

perceived clairvoyantly as an “elderly man,” that could never be, he add-

1 The Theosophist, Vol. V, Nos 3-4, December to January, 1883–1884, pp. 61-62.





of 17

ed, as real clairvoyance could lead no one into such mistaken notions;

and then [40] he kindly reprimanded me for giving any importance to the

age of a Guru, adding that appearances were often false, &c. and explain-

ing other points.

The account of Rajani Kant Brahmachārin himself, signed Almora, 3rd June 1884,

was published in The Theosophist,1 with an Editorial Note signed by Dāmodar. It is

titled, “Interview with a Mahatma.”2 No additional information of any importance is

furnished therein, as compared with Dāmodar’s own statement, the account of

Mohini M. Chatterji, and the story of Preo Nath Banerjee which appears above.

— Boris de Zirkoff.

1 Vol. V, August 1884, p. 270

2 [Consult “Mahatmas and Chelas,” in our Higher Ethics and Devotion Series. — ED. PHIL.]



THE HIMALAYAN BROTHERS “POSSESS THE EARTH”


of 17

Letter from R. Ragoonath Row on the Puranic Dynasties of the

Moryas and the Koothoomi.

First published in The Theosophist, Vol. V, No 3 (51), December 1883, p. 99. Republished in Blavatsky

Collected Writings, (THE PURANAS ON THE DYNASTIES OF THE MORYAS AND THE KOOTHOOMI) VI

p. 40.

It is stated in Matsya Purāna1 that ten Moryas would reign over India, and would be

succeeded by Shoongas, and that Shata Dhanva will be the first of these ten

Maureyas (or Moryas).

In Vishnu Purāna2 it is stated that there was in the Soorya Dynasty a king called

“Maru, who, through the power of devotion (Yoga), is still living in the village called

Kalapa,” in the Himalayas,3 and who “in a future age, will be the restorer of the

Kshatriya race in the solar dynasty,” that is, many thousands of years hence. In an-

other part of the same Purāna4 it is stated that “upon the cessation of the race of

Nanda, the Mauryas5 will possess the earth, for Kautilya will place Chandragupta on

the throne.” Col. Tod considers Morya, or Maurya, a corruption of Mori, the name of

a Rajput tribe. The Tika on the Mahavansa thinks that the princes of the town Mori

were thence called Mauryas. Vachaspati, a Sanskrit Encyclopædist, places the village

of Kalapa on the northern side of the Himalayas — hence in Tibet. The same is stated

in Chapter 12 (Skandha) of Bhagavat.

The Vāyu Purāna seems to declare that he [Maru] will re-establish the Kshatri-

yas in the nineteenth coming yuga.6

In Chapter VI, Book III, of Vishnu Purāna, a Rishi called Koothumi is mentioned. Will

any of our brothers tell us how our Mahatmas stand to these revered personages?

Yours obediently,

R. RAGOONATH ROW

(Dewan Bahadoor ) Prest. Madras Theosophical Society

1 Chapter 272

2 Book IV, Chapter 4

3 Vide p. 197, Vol. III, by Wilson.

4 Book IV, Chapter 24

5 [“Of the dynasty of Moriyan Sovereigns,” as said in the Mahāvanśa — the particulars of this legend are rec-

orded in the Atthakathā of the Uttaravihāra priests. — H.P. Blavatsky.]

6 Vol. III, p. 325





of 17


First published in The Theosophist, Vol. V, No 3 (51), December 1883, p. 99. Republished in Blavatsky

Collected Writings, (THE PURANAS ON THE DYNASTIES OF THE MORYAS AND THE KOOTHOOMI) VI

pp. 41-42.

In the Buddhist Mahavanśa, Chandagutta or Chandragupta, Asoka’s grandfather, is

called a prince of the Moriyan dynasty as he certainly was — or rather, as they were,

— for there were several Chandraguptas. This dynasty, as said in the same book, be-

gan with certain Kshatriyas (warriors) of the Śākya line closely related to Gautama

Buddha who crossing the Himavantah (Himalayas),

. . . discovered a delightful location, well-watered, and situated in the midst of a

forest of lofty bo and other trees. There they founded a town, which was called

by its Śākya lords — Moriya-Nagara.

Prof. Max Müller would see in this legend a made-up story for two reasons:

1 A desire on the part of the Buddhists to connect their king Asoka, “the beloved

of gods” with Buddha, and thus nullify the slanders set up by the Brāhmanical

opponents to Buddhism to the effect that Asoka and Chandragupta were Su-

dras; and

2 Because this document does not dovetail with his own theories and chronology

based on the cock-and-bull stories of the Greek Megasthenes and others. It is

not the princes of Moriya-Nagara who owe their name to the Rajput tribe of Mo-

ri, but the latter that became so well known as being composed of the descend-

ants of the first sovereign of Moriya, Nagari-Mōrya.

The subsequent destiny of that dynasty is more than hinted at, on pages 39 and 40

(footnote) in the November number of The Theosophist.1 Page 43 of the same maga-

zine gives full details. The name of Rishi Koothumi is mentioned in more than one

Purāna, and his Code is among the 18 Codes written by the various Rishis and pre-

served at Calcutta in the library of the Asiatic Society. But we have not been told

whether there is any connection between our Mahatma of that name, and the Rishi,

and we do not feel justified in speculating upon the subject. All we know is, that both

are Northern Brahmans, while the Moryas are Kshatriyas. If any of our Brothers

know more or can discover anything relating to the subject in [42] the Sacred books,

we will hear of it with pleasure. The words:

. . . the Moryas will possess the earth for Kautilya will place Chandragupta on

the throne,

have in our occult philosophy and interpretations a dual meaning:

In one sense they relate to the days of early Buddhism, when a Chandragupta

(Morya) was the King “of all the earth,” i.e., of Brahmans who believed them-

selves the highest and only representatives of humanity for whom Earth was

evolved.

1 [Vol. V, 1883. This refers to the same text as is found on pp. 246-47, and 256-58, in Vol. V, of present Series.

— Boris de Zirkoff.]





of 17

The second meaning is purely esoteric. Every adept or genuine Mahatma is said

to “possess the earth,” by the power of his occult knowledge. Hence — a series

of 10 Moryas, all initiated adepts, would be regarded by the occultists, and re-

ferred to, as “possessing all the earth” or all its knowledge. The names of

“Chandragupta” and “Kautilya” have also an esoteric significance.

Let our Brother ponder over their Sanskrit meaning, and he will perhaps see what

bearing the phrase — “for Kautilya will place Chandragupta upon the throne” — has

upon the Moryas possessing the earth. We would also remind our Brother that the

word Itihāsa, ordinarily translated as “history,” is defined by Sanskrit authorities to

be the narrative of the lives of some august personages, conveying at the same time

meanings of the highest moral and occult importance.


The trans-Himalayan Mahatmas are men living on earth

Documents

Transcript of The trans-Himalayan Mahatmas are men living on earth